Normative Modes

Author(s):  
Paula Boddington

This chapter focuses on the production of normative codes or standards in response to ethical issues concerning artificial intelligence (AI). Codes can be a useful part of ethics, but have limits and dangers. Standards can be especially useful in technical achievement of goals and exploring possibilities. However, codes of ethics are embedded within far wider questions of value—values which may not be explicitly included in the codes themselves, but which are assumed or referenced within wider societal values and norms within which the codes are nested. These values themselves can evolve. As such, when it comes to AI, people need to be prepared for even larger shifts in how they think of value. Moreover, given the power of AI to augment or replace human thought and human agency, people need to consider basic philosophical questions about human nature in order to assess how humans might fare in response to AI.

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Sibel Oktar Thomas

The moral nature of corporations has been discussed for a long time. But, since 2001, with enormous economic effects of the misconduct of some corporations this discussion gained another dimension, it moved into the public sphere, the subject became more sensitive. The anger and mistrust of the public toward business triggered legislators and corporations to take urgent action. For example, just after the collapse of Enron (2001) the American Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) that covers the responsibilities of boards of directors and requires compliance training at all levels. It also revived the old controversial arguments about the nature of business – whether the only purpose of business is to make profits, the relationship of business and ethics – whether business ethics is an oxymoron, and human nature – whether it is ‘bad apples’ or ‘bad barrels’. Yet, with new sets of regulations, in 2017, we are still witnessing the misconduct of corporations on a global scale. This article investigates the effectiveness of corporate efforts such as revisiting mission statements, polishing the codes of ethics and conducting training, by evaluating the nature of business, human nature and the understanding of ethics in the workplace. By looking through the lens of utilitarianism of ethical issues in business, I will argue that codes of ethics and ethics training are necessary but not sufficient. Within the scope of this paper I wish to pave the way to a holistic approach which is necessary and sufficient to create ethical businesses.


2022 ◽  
pp. 526-551

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss strategies that can be applied in the domain of cyberlaw. The chapter begins by distinguishing between ethics, morality, and law. It then focuses on the relation between ethics and digital technologies. The chapter then examines proposals for what should be included in codes of ethics as well as examples of codes of ethics for IT companies. The examples include the British Computer Society, the Association for Computer Machinery, and the Data Processing Management Association. Next, ethical codes for regulating automation, computerization, and artificial intelligence are summarized. The chapter then discusses ethical issues surrounding privacy, anonymity, and personal data, including the EU's right of access by data subjects as well as issues connected with big data. The chapter then focuses on crimes caused by digitization and the protection of intellectual property. The chapter concludes by considering recent laws of ecommerce as well as social and international legal challenges of regulating cyberspace.


This book explores the intertwining domains of artificial intelligence (AI) and ethics—two highly divergent fields which at first seem to have nothing to do with one another. AI is a collection of computational methods for studying human knowledge, learning, and behavior, including by building agents able to know, learn, and behave. Ethics is a body of human knowledge—far from completely understood—that helps agents (humans today, but perhaps eventually robots and other AIs) decide how they and others should behave. Despite these differences, however, the rapid development in AI technology today has led to a growing number of ethical issues in a multitude of fields, ranging from disciplines as far-reaching as international human rights law to issues as intimate as personal identity and sexuality. In fact, the number and variety of topics in this volume illustrate the width, diversity of content, and at times exasperating vagueness of the boundaries of “AI Ethics” as a domain of inquiry. Within this discourse, the book points to the capacity of sociotechnical systems that utilize data-driven algorithms to classify, to make decisions, and to control complex systems. Given the wide-reaching and often intimate impact these AI systems have on daily human lives, this volume attempts to address the increasingly complicated relations between humanity and artificial intelligence. It considers not only how humanity must conduct themselves toward AI but also how AI must behave toward humanity.


Author(s):  
Bryant Walker Smith

This chapter highlights key ethical issues in the use of artificial intelligence in transport by using automated driving as an example. These issues include the tension between technological solutions and policy solutions; the consequences of safety expectations; the complex choice between human authority and computer authority; and power dynamics among individuals, governments, and companies. In 2017 and 2018, the U.S. Congress considered automated driving legislation that was generally supported by many of the larger automated-driving developers. However, this automated-driving legislation failed to pass because of a lack of trust in technologies and institutions. Trustworthiness is much more of an ethical question. Automated vehicles will not be driven by individuals or even by computers; they will be driven by companies acting through their human and machine agents. An essential issue for this field—and for artificial intelligence generally—is how the companies that develop and deploy these technologies should earn people’s trust.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Raymond Geis ◽  
Adrian Brady ◽  
Carol C. Wu ◽  
Jack Spencer ◽  
Erik Ranschaert ◽  
...  

Abstract This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine, European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Canadian Association of Radiologists, and American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AI has great potential to increase efficiency and accuracy throughout radiology, but also carries inherent pitfalls and biases. Widespread use of AI-based intelligent and autonomous systems in radiology can increase the risk of systemic errors with high consequence, and highlights complex ethical and societal issues. Currently, there is little experience using AI for patient care in diverse clinical settings. Extensive research is needed to understand how to best deploy AI in clinical practice. This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a just manner. We believe AI should respect human rights and freedoms, including dignity and privacy. It should be designed for maximum transparency and dependability. Ultimate responsibility and accountability for AI remains with its human designers and operators for the foreseeable future. The radiology community should start now to develop codes of ethics and practice for AI which promote any use that helps patients and the common good and should block use of radiology data and algorithms for financial gain without those two attributes.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Murphy ◽  
Erica Di Ruggiero ◽  
Ross Upshur ◽  
Donald J. Willison ◽  
Neha Malhotra ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has been described as the “fourth industrial revolution” with transformative and global implications, including in healthcare, public health, and global health. AI approaches hold promise for improving health systems worldwide, as well as individual and population health outcomes. While AI may have potential for advancing health equity within and between countries, we must consider the ethical implications of its deployment in order to mitigate its potential harms, particularly for the most vulnerable. This scoping review addresses the following question: What ethical issues have been identified in relation to AI in the field of health, including from a global health perspective? Methods Eight electronic databases were searched for peer reviewed and grey literature published before April 2018 using the concepts of health, ethics, and AI, and their related terms. Records were independently screened by two reviewers and were included if they reported on AI in relation to health and ethics and were written in the English language. Data was charted on a piloted data charting form, and a descriptive and thematic analysis was performed. Results Upon reviewing 12,722 articles, 103 met the predetermined inclusion criteria. The literature was primarily focused on the ethics of AI in health care, particularly on carer robots, diagnostics, and precision medicine, but was largely silent on ethics of AI in public and population health. The literature highlighted a number of common ethical concerns related to privacy, trust, accountability and responsibility, and bias. Largely missing from the literature was the ethics of AI in global health, particularly in the context of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Conclusions The ethical issues surrounding AI in the field of health are both vast and complex. While AI holds the potential to improve health and health systems, our analysis suggests that its introduction should be approached with cautious optimism. The dearth of literature on the ethics of AI within LMICs, as well as in public health, also points to a critical need for further research into the ethical implications of AI within both global and public health, to ensure that its development and implementation is ethical for everyone, everywhere.


2021 ◽  
pp. 002203452110138
Author(s):  
C.M. Mörch ◽  
S. Atsu ◽  
W. Cai ◽  
X. Li ◽  
S.A. Madathil ◽  
...  

Dentistry increasingly integrates artificial intelligence (AI) to help improve the current state of clinical dental practice. However, this revolutionary technological field raises various complex ethical challenges. The objective of this systematic scoping review is to document the current uses of AI in dentistry and the ethical concerns or challenges they imply. Three health care databases (MEDLINE [PubMed], SciVerse Scopus, and Cochrane Library) and 2 computer science databases (ArXiv, IEEE Xplore) were searched. After identifying 1,553 records, the documents were filtered, and a full-text screening was performed. In total, 178 studies were retained and analyzed by 8 researchers specialized in dentistry, AI, and ethics. The team used Covidence for data extraction and Dedoose for the identification of ethics-related information. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Among the included studies, 130 (73.0%) studies were published after 2016, and 93 (52.2%) were published in journals specialized in computer sciences. The technologies used were neural learning techniques for 75 (42.1%), traditional learning techniques for 76 (42.7%), or a combination of several technologies for 20 (11.2%). Overall, 7 countries contributed to 109 (61.2%) studies. A total of 53 different applications of AI in dentistry were identified, involving most dental specialties. The use of initial data sets for internal validation was reported in 152 (85.4%) studies. Forty-five ethical issues (related to the use AI in dentistry) were reported in 22 (12.4%) studies around 6 principles: prudence (10 times), equity (8), privacy (8), responsibility (6), democratic participation (4), and solidarity (4). The ratio of studies mentioning AI-related ethical issues has remained similar in the past years, showing that there is no increasing interest in the field of dentistry on this topic. This study confirms the growing presence of AI in dentistry and highlights a current lack of information on the ethical challenges surrounding its use. In addition, the scarcity of studies sharing their code could prevent future replications. The authors formulate recommendations to contribute to a more responsible use of AI technologies in dentistry.


Author(s):  
Jessica Morley ◽  
Anat Elhalal ◽  
Francesca Garcia ◽  
Libby Kinsey ◽  
Jakob Mökander ◽  
...  

AbstractAs the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the associated ethical issues. This increased awareness has led to the realisation that existing legislation and regulation provides insufficient protection to individuals, groups, society, and the environment from AI harms. In response to this realisation, there has been a proliferation of principle-based ethics codes, guidelines and frameworks. However, it has become increasingly clear that a significant gap exists between the theory of AI ethics principles and the practical design of AI systems. In previous work, we analysed whether it is possible to close this gap between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of AI ethics through the use of tools and methods designed to help AI developers, engineers, and designers translate principles into practice. We concluded that this method of closure is currently ineffective as almost all existing translational tools and methods are either too flexible (and thus vulnerable to ethics washing) or too strict (unresponsive to context). This raised the question: if, even with technical guidance, AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic design, is the entire pro-ethical design endeavour rendered futile? And, if no, then how can AI ethics be made useful for AI practitioners? This is the question we seek to address here by exploring why principles and technical translational tools are still needed even if they are limited, and how these limitations can be potentially overcome by providing theoretical grounding of a concept that has been termed ‘Ethics as a Service.’


Author(s):  
AJung Moon ◽  
Shalaleh Rismani ◽  
H. F. Machiel Van der Loos

Abstract Purpose of Review To summarize the set of roboethics issues that uniquely arise due to the corporeality and physical interaction modalities afforded by robots, irrespective of the degree of artificial intelligence present in the system. Recent Findings One of the recent trends in the discussion of ethics of emerging technologies has been the treatment of roboethics issues as those of “embodied AI,” a subset of AI ethics. In contrast to AI, however, robots leverage human’s natural tendency to be influenced by our physical environment. Recent work in human-robot interaction highlights the impact a robot’s presence, capacity to touch, and move in our physical environment has on people, and helping to articulate the ethical issues particular to the design of interactive robotic systems. Summary The corporeality of interactive robots poses unique sets of ethical challenges. These issues should be considered in the design irrespective of and in addition to the ethics of artificial intelligence implemented in them.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document